Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T13:16:31.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ANAPHORA RESOLUTION IN L2 ENGLISH

AN ANALYSIS OF DISCOURSE COMPLEXITY AND CROSS-LINGUISTIC INTERFERENCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2019

Carla Contemori ,
Ohood Asiri  and
Elva Deida Perea Irigoyen
Carla Contemori*
Affiliation:
University of Texas, El Paso
Ohood Asiri
Affiliation:
University of Texas, El Paso
Elva Deida Perea Irigoyen
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad Juarez
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Carla Contemori, Department of Languages and Linguistics, University of Texas at El Paso, 500 W. University Ave, El Paso, Texas 79968. E-mail: carla.contemori@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We test the interpretation of pronominal forms in L2 speakers of English whose L1 is Spanish. Previous research on learners of nonnull subject languages has shown conflicting results. The aim of the present study is to reconcile previous evidence and shed light on the factors that determine learners’ difficulty to interpret pronominal forms in the L2. In six comprehension experiments, we found that intermediate L2 speakers did not show increased difficulty compared to native speakers in integrating multiple sources of information (syntactic, discourse, pragmatic) to resolve ambiguous pronouns in intrasentential anaphora and cataphora conditions. However, we also found that when two referents with equal prominence are introduced using a conjoined noun phrase in the preceding context, the learner’s performance is significantly different than the performance of the native speakers, both in intrasentential and intersentential anaphora. We suggest that L2 speakers may encounter difficulties evaluating the salience of the antecedents during pronoun resolution.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 41 , Issue 5 , December 2019 , pp. 971 - 998
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun phrase antecedents . New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Arnold, J. (2010). How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, J., & Griffin, Z. M. (2007). The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 521–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D. M., & Sarkar, D. (2007). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.99875-6.Google Scholar
Baumann, P., Konieczny, L., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Conversational implicatures in anaphora resolution: Alternative constructions and referring expressions. In Hemforth, B., Mertins, B., & Fabricius-Hansen, C. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic approaches to meaning and understanding across languages (pp. 197–212). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carminati, M. N. (2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Amherst: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Chamorro, G. (2018). Offline interpretation of subject pronouns by native speakers of Spanish. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 27. doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contemori, C., & Dussias, G. (2015). Pronouns in L2 discourse: Evidence from eye-tracking and production. BUCLD 39 Online Proceedings Supplement. Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/bucld/files/2015/06/Contemori.pdfGoogle Scholar
Contemori, C., & Dussias, G. (2016). Referential choice in a second language: Evidence for a listener-oriented approach. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 1257–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunnings, I. (2017) Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 712–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunnings, I., Fotiadou, G., & Tsimpli, I. (2017). Anaphora resolution and reanalysis during L2 sentence processing: Evidence from the visual world paradigm. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 621–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellert, M. (2013). Resolving ambiguous pronouns in a second language: A visual-world eye-tracking study with Dutch learners of German. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 171–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandes, E., Luegi, B., Soares, C., de la Fuente, I., & Hemforth, B. (2018). Adaptation in pronoun resolution: Evidence from Brazilian and European Portuguese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 44(12), 1986–2008. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000569.Google ScholarPubMed
Filiaci, F., Sorace, A., & Carreiras, M. (2014). Anaphoric biases of null and overt subjects in Italian and Spanish: A cross-linguistic comparison. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 825–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keating, G. D., Jegerski, J., & VanPatten, B. (2016). Online processing of subject pronouns in monolingual and heritage bilingual speakers of Mexican Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, G., VanPatten, B., & Jegerski, J. (2011). Who was walking on the beach: Anaphora resolution in Spanish heritage speakers and adult second language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP-Q). Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miltsakaki, E. (2002). Towards an aposynthesis of topic continuity and intrasentential anaphora. Computational Linguistics, 28, 319–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Rodríguez Louro, C. (2006). Beyond the syntax of the null subject parameter. In Torrens, V. & Escobar, L. (Eds.), The acquisition of syntax in romance languages (pp. 401–418). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. (2008). How pragmatically odd! Interface delays and pronominal subject distribution in L2 Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 1, 317–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schimke, S., & Colonna, S. (2016). Native and non-native interpretation of pronominal forms: Evidence from French and Turkish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 131–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2007). Cross-linguistic influence in the interpretation of anaphoric and cataphoric pronouns in English–Italian bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shin, N. L., & Cairns, H. S. (2009). Subject pronouns in child Spanish and continuity of reference. In Collentine, J., García, M., Lafford, B., & Marín, F. M. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 11th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 155–164). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles . Oxford. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., Serratrice, L., Filiaci, F., & Baldo, M. (2009). Discourse conditions on subject pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of older bilingual children. Lingua, 119, 460–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trnavac, R., & Taboada, M. (2016) Cataphora, backgrounding and accessibility in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 93, 68–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gompel, R. P. G., & Liversedge, S. P. (2003). The influence of morphological information on cataphoric pronoun assignment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 128–139.Google ScholarPubMed
Vogels, J., Krahmer, E., & Maes, A. (2014). How cognitive load influences speakers’ choice of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 39, 1396–1418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, F. (2009). Processing at the Syntax-Discourse Interface in Second Language Acquisition(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar